Venugopal v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10.03.2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN 1.Venugopal 2.Umarani ... Petitioners/Accused Rank 4 and 5 Vs State through The Inspector of Police, Economic Offences wing(II)Unit, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.
(Crime No.2 of 2022) ... Respondent/Complainant Shanmuga Devar ... Petiitoner/Intervening Petitioner/ De-facto Complainant In Crl.MP(MD).13306/2022 in Crl.OP(MD).12554/2022 Sankarasubbiramaniyan ... Intervener/Defacto Complainant In Crl.MP(MD).8456/2022 in Crl.OP(MD).12554/2022 Peula Malini ... Intervener/Petitioner/Victim In Crl.MP(MD).11255/2022 in Crl.OP(MD).12554/2022 For Petitioners : Mr.E.MAREESKUMAR, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.R.M.ANBUNITHI, Additional Public Prosecutor For Intervenors : Mr.A.BALAJI, Advocate In Crl.MP(MD).13306/2022 Mr.R.KARUNANITHI, Advocate In Crl.MP(MD).8456/2022 Mr.M.PARAMASIVAN, Advocate In Crl.MP(MD).11255/2022 PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C 1/3
PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.2 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A4 & A5, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120-B IPC and Section 5 of TNPID Act, 1997 in Crime No.2 of 2022, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons was running finance company, namely Sree Krishna Groups, they informed that they have attractive plans to invest money. Believeing the same, the defacto complainant invested huge money and the accused persons promised to return the same as plots. Thereafter, they failed to do so. Hence the case.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that due to COVID-19 situation, they failed to execute the sale deed and they are going to register the plots. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police would submit that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is very much necessary since they have received Rs.1.5 Crores from the general public and failed to execute the sale deed. 5.Heard and perused the materials available in the records. 6.It is seen that there are totally seven accused in this case and the petitioners are arrayed as A4 and A5. Totally there are 500 depositors and they have invested a sum of Rs.1.5 Crores with the accused persons, in order to get house plots. However, after receiving entire amount, the accused persons failed to execute sale deed in their favour.
7.In view of the seriousness of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. sd/- 10/03/2023 / TRUE COPY / /03/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
2/3
GNS TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ECONOMIC OFFENCES WING(II)UNIT, TIRUNELVELI, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.
2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1. CC to M/S.MAREESKUMAR E Advocate SR.No.3900 +1. CC to M/S.A.BALAJI, Advocate SR.No.3995
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.12554 of 2022 Date :10/03/2023 SA/MMS/SAR.3/23.03.2023/3P/5C 3/3